HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2004 Ron Paul 14:1
We will soon debate the “Broadcast
Indecency Act of 2004” on the House Floor.
This atrocious piece of legislation should be defeated.
It cannot improve the moral behavior of U.S. citizens, but it
can do
irreparable harm to our cherished right to freedom of speech.
2004 Ron Paul 14:2
This attempt at regulating and punishing indecent and sexually provocative
language suggests a comparison to the Wahhabi religious police of Saudi
Arabia,
who control the “Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention
of
Vice.”
Though both may be
motivated by the good intentions of improving moral behavior, using
government
force to do so is fraught with great danger and has no chance of
success.
2004 Ron Paul 14:3
Regulating speech is a dangerous notion, and not compatible with the principles
of a free society.
The Founders
recognized this, and thus explicitly prohibited Congress from making
any laws
that might abridge freedom of speech or of the press.
2004 Ron Paul 14:4
But we have in recent decades seen a steady erosion of this protection of free
speech.
2004 Ron Paul 14:5
This process started years ago when an arbitrary distinction was made by the
political left between commercial and non-commercial speech, thus
permitting
government to regulate and censor commercial speech.
Since only a few participated in commercial speech, few
cared — and besides, the government was there to protect us from
unethical
advertisements.
Supporters of this
policy failed to understand that anti-fraud laws and state laws could
adequately
deal with this common problem found in all societies.
2004 Ron Paul 14:6
Disheartening as it may be, the political left, which was supposed to care more
about the 1st Amendment than the right, has ventured in recent years to
curtail
so-called “hate speech” by championing political correctness.
In the last few decades we’ve seen the
political-correctness crowd, in the name of improving personal behavior
and
language, cause individuals to lose their jobs, cause careers to be
ruined,
cause athletes to be trashed, and cause public speeches on liberal
campuses to
be disrupted and even banned.
These
tragedies have been caused by the so-called champions of free speech.
Over the years, tolerance for the views of those with whom
campus
liberals disagree has nearly evaporated.
The
systematic and steady erosion of freedom of speech continues.
2004 Ron Paul 14:7
Just one year ago we saw a coalition of both left and right push through the
radical Campaign Finance Reform Act, which strictly curtails the rights
all
Americans to speak out against particular candidates at the time of
elections.
Amazingly, this usurpation by Congress was upheld by the Supreme
Court,
which showed no concern for the restrictions on political speech during
political campaigns.
Instead of
admitting that money and corruption in government is not a consequence
of too
much freedom of expression, but rather a result of government acting
outside the
bounds of the Constitution, this new law addressed a symptom rather
than the
cause of special interest control of our legislative process.
2004 Ron Paul 14:8
And now comes the right’s attack on the 1st Amendment, with its effort to
stamp out “indecent” language on the airways.
And it will be assumed that if one is not with them in this
effort, then
one must support the trash seen and heard in the movie theaters and on
our
televisions and radios.
For social
rather than constitutional reasons, some on the left express opposition
to this
proposal.
2004 Ron Paul 14:9
But this current proposal is dangerous. Since
most Americans- I hope- are still for freedom of expression of
political ideas
and religious beliefs, no one claims that anyone who endorses freedom
of speech
therefore endorses the nutty philosophy and religious views that are
expressed.
We should all know that the 1st Amendment was not written to
protect
non-controversial mainstream speech, but rather the ideas and beliefs
of what
the majority see as controversial or fringe.
2004 Ron Paul 14:10
The temptation has always been great to legislatively restrict rudeness,
prejudice, and minority views, and it’s easiest to start by attacking
the
clearly obnoxious expressions that most deem offensive.
The real harm comes later.
But “later” is now approaching.
2004 Ron Paul 14:11
The failure to understand that radio, TV, and movies more often than not reflect
the peoples’ attitudes prompts this effort.
It was never law that prohibited moral degradation in earlier
times.
It was the moral standards of the people who rejected the smut
that we
now see as routine entertainment.
Merely
writing laws and threatening huge fines will not improve the moral
standards of
the people.
Laws like the proposed
“Broadcast Indecency Act of 2004” merely address the symptom of a
decaying
society, while posing a greater threat to freedom of expression.
Laws may attempt to silence the bigoted and the profane, but the
hearts
and minds of those individuals will not be changed.
Societal standards will not be improved.
Government has no control over these standards, and can only
undermine
liberty in its efforts to make individuals more moral or the economy
fairer.
2004 Ron Paul 14:12
Proponents of using government authority to censor certain undesirable images
and comments on the airwaves resort to the claim that the airways
belong to all
the people, and therefore it’s the government’s responsibility to
protect
them.
The mistake of never having
privatized the radio and TV airwaves does not justify ignoring the 1st
Amendment
mandate that “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech.”
When everyone owns something, in reality
nobody owns it.
Control then occurs merely by the whims of the politicians in
power.
From the very start, licensing of radio and TV frequencies
invited
government censorship that is no less threatening than that found in
totalitarian societies.
2004 Ron Paul 14:13
We should not ignore the smut and trash that has invaded our society, but laws
like this will not achieve the goals that many seek.
If a moral society could be created by law, we would have had
one a long
time ago.
The religious
fundamentalists in control of other countries would have led the way.
Instead, authoritarian violence reigns in
those countries.
2004 Ron Paul 14:14
If it is not recognized that this is the wrong approach to improve the quality
of the airways, a heavy price will be paid.
The solution to decaying moral standards has to be voluntary,
through
setting examples in our families, churches, and communities- never by
government
coercion.
It just doesn’t work.
2004 Ron Paul 14:15
But the argument is always that the people are in great danger if government
does not act by:
2004 Ron Paul 14:17
- Claiming insensitive
language
hurts people, and political correctness guidelines are needed to
protect the
weak;
2004 Ron Paul 14:18
- Arguing that campaign
finance
reform is needed to hold down government corruption by the special
interests;
2004 Ron Paul 14:19
- Banning indecency on the
airways
that some believe encourages immoral behavior.
2004 Ron Paul 14:20
If we accept the
principle that these dangers must be prevented through coercive
government
restrictions on expression, it must logically follow that all dangers
must be
stamped out, especially those that are even more dangerous than those
already
dealt with.
This principle is
adhered to in all totalitarian societies.
That
means total control of freedom of expression of all political and
religious
views.
This certainly was the case
with the Soviets, the Nazis, the Cambodians, and the Chinese communists.
And yet these governments literally caused the deaths of
hundreds of
millions of people throughout the 20th Century.
This is the real danger, and if we’re in the business of
protecting the
people from all danger, this will be the logical next step.
2004 Ron Paul 14:21
It could easily be argued that this must be done, since political ideas and
fanatical religious beliefs are by far the most dangerous ideas known
to man.
Sadly, we’re moving in that direction, and no matter how well
intended
the promoters of these limits on the 1st Amendment are, both on the
left and the
right, they nevertheless endorse the principle of suppressing any
expressions of
dissent if one chooses to criticize the government.
2004 Ron Paul 14:22
When the direct attack on political and religious views comes, initially it will
be on targets that most will ignore, since they will be seen as outside
the
mainstream and therefore unworthy of defending – like the Branch
Davidians or
Lyndon LaRouche.
2004 Ron Paul 14:23
Rush Limbaugh has it right (at least on this one), and correctly fears the
speech police.
He states:
“I’m in the free speech business,” as he defends Howard Stern
and
criticizes any government effort to curtail speech on the airways,
while
recognizing the media companies’ authority and responsibility to
self-regulate.
2004 Ron Paul 14:24
Congress has been a poor steward of the 1st Amendment.
This newest attack should alert us all to the dangers of
government
regulating freedom of speech — of any kind.